Thursday, June 28, 2012

It's People! (Soylent Green)



Soylent Green: A Self-Consuming Dystopia

In accordance with my informal project of viewing those film classics from the past that I have missed, I had a chance to view the 1973 film “Soylent Green” today. It is a film that seemed to have made an impact back in the 70s, and I remember that it was billed as a sociological thriller, one which addressed important issues of that decade. The famous tag line was familiar to me even as a child, and it seemed deliciously nauseating.

In this society, set in New York in the near future (2022), we have a society that seems to have become more sordid and dysfunctional than ever. The population of the city has ballooned to forty million, and one can only imagine a similar growth in other areas. There is a general seediness, and people are crammed into buildings, forced to live in stairwells and living what would ostensibly be a routine that was governed by the pattern set in communist societies. People spend all day in lines, waiting to receive their ration of food and water. And the former (Soylent Green), consists of a bland wafer of different colors, one which promises to deliver all the nutritional value needed.

This is a world that reflects the concern that was evident at the time with the threat of ecological devastation and overpopulation. This was, after all, the period in which Paul Ehrlich’s famous book “The Population Bomb” was published, and also, a few years after Rachel Carson’s “Silent Spring”. It seemed to capture the fears that many had that our world was bearing ahead on an unsustainable trajectory. This was the era in which the ecological movement was born, when the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) was established in order to monitor the contamination that accompanied modern industrial society.


In this movie, the fears have come true, and we live in a society of notable shortages. People are treated almost like a nuisance, because of their overabundance, and we have a police state to control them. The protagonist, a detective by the name of Thorn (Heston), lives in a very cramped and dark apartment, a hovel, really, with a friend, a former detective and scholar by the name of Sol Roth (Edward G. Robinson). The elder man beguiles the younger with tales of an unspoiled past in which people had a closer connection with their world, in which nature had not been despoiled, and in which people didn’t need to put up with heatwave conditions all year long (ninety degrees at night).

This film is a murder mystery in which the demise of a rich industrialist by the name of Simmonson is being investigated in a dogged fashion by the Carlton Heston character. The industrialist lived in a completely separate world, in a luxurious apartment with beautiful furniture and running water. It seems like a vision of a magical world for the detective, and there is also a beautiful woman who seems to represent a necessary accouterment, another “piece of furniture”. She and other beautiful women are treated as chattel by the rich men of this society, but this one seems much too vulnerable and innocent, and awakens the interest of Thorn. (In an interesting sidenote, he also seems to treat her as a disposable item, except when he reveals a protective impulse that ends up seducing her.)

The murder consumes the detective, but we are able to see how the powerful agents of order work to clamp down on this investigation when he starts turning up dangerous incongruities and facts. The industrialist was a lawyer who was on the board of the “Soylent” corporation, and he seems to have had an overwhelming sense of guilt. He visited a priest a few days before his murder, and he seems to have accepted his murder.

And what ensues is a pursuit in which Thorn follows all the leads, using the brutal tactics of a police offer who doesn’t need to worry about habeus corpus and barges into buildings and apartments without a search warrant, brutalizing the inhabitants and he searches for new clues. And, of course, he is pursued himself, and he knows it. What role does the bodyguard of the late industrialist have to play?

One of the annoying elements of this film has to do with the physical aspect of these people of the future. It is unsettling and rings false to see people who would supposedly live in a state of desperation going about clean-shaven (but with a little smudging added to their faces), people who in addition seem to have perfect teeth and the “Hollywood” look of actors who don’t look like normal people but instead like beautiful people without scars, without physical imperfections, smooth-skinned, etc. The grime is not convincing, nor is the fact that the population of this future metropolis is so overwhelmingly Caucasian. There are a few African-American roles in this film, and the bodyguard has an African-American woman as a lover/companion, but it somehow doesn’t ring true unless we are lead to believe that segregation continues to play a role in the future, and that this film was set in a Caucasian neighborhood.

In the end, Sol Roth and his group of investigators find out the truth with their own resources, and he, the faithful companion and father figure for Thorn, decides to leave this world by entering into a euthanasia center, leaving a short and unsentimental note for his friend. The building, the attire of the attendants, the ceremony, the visual aids, the music, the robes, everything in this center recalls the world of “Logan’s Run”, a science fiction thriller that would be released a few years later. It is an antiseptic vision of a future, and seems to reveal a contemporary vision of how a futuristic society would look. Nothing like the grunge of the Alien movies, the idea that grime would not magically disappear in the future.

Soylent Green is people, indeed. Cadavers are taken from centers such as this one, and probably from many other supply points, and ground and processed into a food that is fed back to the surviving population. What I have to question is the following: why is food divested of its cultural component? There is much, much more to food than merely the satisfaction of a hunger instinct. Food is a ritual, it fills a psychological need, it is colored by ceremonies that have to do with the preparation and the ritual consumption of food in a group, in cafés, chewed and savored and appreciated for its familiarity and for its sensory richness. Has all this disappeared in the future, and can people really be satisfied eating multicolored Wheat Thins? Is this a sign of the psychological barrenness of the future?

Also, the other element that disturbs me is the fact that these people of the future seem to continue breeding wildly even in the face of these demoralizing conditions, with so many out of work, dying in the streets, living a life in queues, living in frustration. Are there no contraceptives available in the future? Did the right-wingers of the Republican party triumph? Why is it that so many people continue to be born, if not for the fact that the population must forcibly live in conditions of extreme educational and cultural neglect, with no memories of the developed world of the past. It seems a dystopia about contemporary political realities as well, and in particular, it seems to underscore the ferment that accompanied the legalization of abortion in “Roe vs. Wade”, also in the early 70s. I might believe the Malthusian proposition of geometric (highly accelerated) population growth, especially as it accompanies technological growth, but we are lacking in the other factor which accompanied this demographic trend in the West, which was the insertion of this trend within an imperial matrix.

We had empires that were growing and were mobilizing new resources. We had new industrial and economic trends that were leading to growing urbanization, we had medicine and improved care, we had points of expansion and vectors of movement. Here, we have an industrial society of the future at a standstill, crammed into stairwells the way chickens are crammed into sterile cages, bred to produce more and more and doomed to a very uncertain future. Without having read the original Harry Harrison story, I am led to speculate about the operation of other social and cultural factors in play here.

This is a dystopia, however, and as always, one that seems to revolve around a murder mystery. And it climaxes in a startling revelation that will seem to make no impact in this future society. The terrible power of these dystopias seems to revolve, as always, in the points of similarity with our own society, and the projection of trends culminating in unsuspected ways, in a repressive, dreary, static society that reflects our own hidden worries. And it is precisely in this static quality, where the committed and ethical individual is unable to have an impact and instead meets a tragic fate, that we find the chilling power of these stories.

The United States of 2012, with ever-increasing wage differentials, with a form of predatory late-Capitalism in operation, with corporations buying elections and behaving with impunity, with a growing health crisis signaled by an obesity crisis and a rising crest of cancer diagnosis and an unstoppable process of global warming in play, and with growing social anomie, seem to be a dystopia in the making as well. It is just a matter of degree.
 
 

Eternal Observer -- ORomero (c) 2013
Copyrights ORomero 2013

No comments:

Post a Comment